Scan barcode
russetray's review against another edition
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
liberrydude's review against another edition
3.0
This starts off as if it could be another Da Vinci Code but it gets bogged down in frequent flashbacks that take away the momentum of the action narrative. It's also makes its points more than once. I get it. Too pedagogical/pedantic. Dan Brown has a tendency to do this as well. Still it's a fanciful yarn and something different. Sierra researches his history well but it's pretty amazing he could be so sloppy to call Navy SEALs soldiers and give them ranks found in the Army. There are no sergeants major in the SEALS. I'll still check out his other book set in New Mexico.
wolfsonarchitect's review against another edition
4.0
This is a thriller based on extensive research on ancient religions across cultures believing they can communicate with the divine. The story combines this theme with Christian interest in the next great flood after Noah as mentioned by Elijiah. This is a fun, lively story that involves some crazy beliefs but it is very interesting; because they have strong historic lineage; so go along for the ride. Set in Spain and Turkey at real sites.
marshaskrypuch's review against another edition
1.0
It was all I could do to force myself to read up to about page 50. I realize it's a translation, but couldn't they have got an editor to go through it and clean up the clunky sentences and the incredibly bad first person point of view? It was like someone did a search and replace on "she" to "I". Ahem, there's a bit more to first person POV than that.
I tried to read it. I really did. I was in the mood for a mindless thriller, but this one is so poorly edited that I could not find the story.
Thank goodness it was a library book. I would have been super annoyed if I had paid for this crap.
I tried to read it. I really did. I was in the mood for a mindless thriller, but this one is so poorly edited that I could not find the story.
Thank goodness it was a library book. I would have been super annoyed if I had paid for this crap.
rachelking's review against another edition
3.0
This book had almost too much going on, with an extensive glossary in the beginning pages - complete with color photos - that I needed to read beforehand to keep up with the plot. Javier Sierra made a point of mixing fact with fiction in this novel, and the book reads like an extensive 'conspiracy theory.' My husband is much more familiar with many aspects of the plot, and I often asked him if what I was reading about was really true or not. The book opens with a quotation of Genesis 6: 2-3, which states "...the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. And the Lord said, 'My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.'" This is followed by a quote from John Dee, who figures prominently in the plot, though I did not find the quote to be especially inspiring.
The main focus of the book is about a group of people who consider themselves descendants of those angels that joined with "the daughters of man," and want to find a way to get back into heaven. They will use any means necessary to accomplish this -- murder, deceit, even putting the whole planet in jeopardy.
The main character, Julia Alvarez, is a psychic who is completely duped by their antics. I understand that the author means for the reader to feel sympathy for the angelic descendants through Julia's narration, but the way that Julia allows herself to be used and deceived by even her own husband disgusts me. She believes whatever they tell her and does not question anything. In fact, anyone that does question this main family is characterized as foolish and forgettable, such as Ellen Watson and Inspector Figueiras.
There was one main problem I had with the plot, which is that in the Bible, the angels that mate with human women are 'fallen' because they disobeyed God, which is never addressed. What is also never addressed is any scriptural substantiation for what they believed about Noah and the ark. They believed they could force God to take them back into heaven with their thrown-together mish-mash of technology. How is that believable? God kicked the angels out - they certainly can't force their way back in! Not to mention, this family does not back up their belief that they are descendants of angels with actual scientific proof, such as DNA tests, even though they all claim to be men (and woman) of science.
Overall, the book twists a blasphemous tale of Biblical scripture, using factual information to support a fictitious plot. It has suspense, intrigue, and even a bit of romance, but the end is neither believable nor enjoyable. While books of this nature became popular thanks to the works of Dan Brown, (yes, I've read his stuff, too), I found this book to be merely an okay read.
The main focus of the book is about a group of people who consider themselves descendants of those angels that joined with "the daughters of man," and want to find a way to get back into heaven. They will use any means necessary to accomplish this -- murder, deceit, even putting the whole planet in jeopardy.
The main character, Julia Alvarez, is a psychic who is completely duped by their antics. I understand that the author means for the reader to feel sympathy for the angelic descendants through Julia's narration, but the way that Julia allows herself to be used and deceived by even her own husband disgusts me. She believes whatever they tell her and does not question anything. In fact, anyone that does question this main family is characterized as foolish and forgettable, such as Ellen Watson and Inspector Figueiras.
There was one main problem I had with the plot, which is that in the Bible, the angels that mate with human women are 'fallen' because they disobeyed God, which is never addressed. What is also never addressed is any scriptural substantiation for what they believed about Noah and the ark. They believed they could force God to take them back into heaven with their thrown-together mish-mash of technology. How is that believable? God kicked the angels out - they certainly can't force their way back in! Not to mention, this family does not back up their belief that they are descendants of angels with actual scientific proof, such as DNA tests, even though they all claim to be men (and woman) of science.
Overall, the book twists a blasphemous tale of Biblical scripture, using factual information to support a fictitious plot. It has suspense, intrigue, and even a bit of romance, but the end is neither believable nor enjoyable. While books of this nature became popular thanks to the works of Dan Brown, (yes, I've read his stuff, too), I found this book to be merely an okay read.
lautzenheiser's review against another edition
2.0
It's not awful, but not great either. Too be fair, I put it down before finishing as it was a struggle to keep going. It was relatively fast paced, but I just never cared about any of the characters, so I just couldnt continue.
alyssa_tauber's review against another edition
1.0
1.5
"The Lost Angel" isn't the worst book I've ever read, but it's still pretty poor. It wants to be a "The Da Vinci Code" type with a lot more preaching, but isn't even as good or enjoyable as "Code." I didn't like "Code" much, so for me that is a low bar to beat, yet "Angel" still fails. The writing is weak, the story is convoluted, and the novel ultimately portrays an abusive relationship in a good light -- after all the protagonist's husband has put her through --lying both outright and through omission, gaslighting, using her-- she feels "gratitude" toward him at the end.
"The Lost Angel" is probably going to appeal mostly to those who like Christian fiction. Others can probably skip it.
"The Lost Angel" isn't the worst book I've ever read, but it's still pretty poor. It wants to be a "The Da Vinci Code" type with a lot more preaching, but isn't even as good or enjoyable as "Code." I didn't like "Code" much, so for me that is a low bar to beat, yet "Angel" still fails. The writing is weak, the story is convoluted, and the novel ultimately portrays an abusive relationship in a good light -- after all the protagonist's husband has put her through --lying both outright and through omission, gaslighting, using her-- she feels "gratitude" toward him at the end.
"The Lost Angel" is probably going to appeal mostly to those who like Christian fiction. Others can probably skip it.
okramsey's review against another edition
1.0
I am guessing there was a lot lost in the translation because I couldn't finish this book. Normally I don't have a problem with translations but if this book was popular enough to be translated there must be something to it. (I really need to learn a couple more languages. Somehow)
marina28's review against another edition
3.0
Necesito una película de este libro, por favor y gracias
More...